t,' or engrossed, in
the Records of Parliament. These 'bookit' transcripts were made
carelessly, and the old copyist was puzzled by the handwriting and
orthography of the alleged originals before him. The controversy about
the genuineness of the five letters took new shapes after Mr. Pitcairn
discovered those apparently in Logan's hand, and printed them in 1832.
Mr. Hill Burton accepts them with no hint of doubt, and if Mr. Tytler was
the most learned and impartial, Mr. Hill Burton was the most sceptical of
our historians. Yet on this point of authenticity these historians were
too hasty. The authenticity of the letters (except one, No. IV) was
denied by the very man, Sprot, in whose possession most of them were
originally found. {170} The evidence of his denial has been extant ever
since Calderwood wrote, who tells us, clearly on the authority of an
older and anonymous History in MS. (now in the Advocates' Library), that
Sprot, when first taken (April 13-19, 1608), accused Logan of writing the
letters, but withdrew the charge under torture, and finally, when kindly
treated by Lord Dunbar, and healed of his wounds, declared that he
himself had forged all the Logan letters (save one). Yet Logan was, to
Sprot's certain knowledge (so Sprot persistently declared), involved in
the Gowrie conspiracy.

Now assuredly this appeared to be an incredible assertion of Calderwood,
or of his MS. source. He was a stern Presbyterian, an enemy of the King
(who banished him), and an intimate friend of the Cranstoun family, who,
in 1600, were closely connected with conspirators of their name. Thus
prejudiced, Calderwood was believed by Mr. Pitcairn to have made an
untrue or confused statement. Logan is in a plot; Sprot knows it, and
yet Sprot forges letters to prove Logan's guilt, and these letters, found
in Sprot's possession, prove his own guilty knowledge. There seems no
sense in such behaviour. It might have been guessed that Sprot knew of
Logan's guilt, but had no documentary evidence of it, and therefore
forged evidence for the purpose of extorting blackmail from Logan. But,
by 1608, when Sprot was arrested with some of the documents in his
pocket, Logan had been dead for nearly two years.

The guess, that Sprot knew of Logan's treason, but forged the proof of
it, for purposes of blackmailing him, was not made by historians. The
guess was getting 'warm,' as children say in their game, was very near
the truth, but it was